Aims and objectives
INTRODUCTION Authors declare no conflicts of interest to disclose. Breast cancer is the most common malignant tumour in women and the most common cause of death due to cancer in women . Mammography is worldwide used as the technique of choice to detect breast cancers because this technique can reduce the mortality due to breast cancer up to 30% . However,
an important controversy exists due to the results of the population-based screening campaigns . One of the most important reasons...
Methods and materials
Patients selection A total number of 9121 patients underwent digital mammography (DM) at our institution (Since November 2011 to December 2013). Additional US and/or DBT were performed in case of lesion detected in DM or ACR patterns 2,
3 or 4. A total of 1042 patients underwent DM + US + DBT. Study design DM were performed both in 45 º mediolateral oblique (MLO) and craniocaudal (CC) views.
DBT studies included one single view (45ºMLO) with a width angle (50º).
US were performed after...
Our database included a total of 1042 patients with a mean age of 56,7 year old [table 1]. Our study is based on a total of 1136 lesions: 110 malignant and 326 benign lesions hystologically proven and 700 normal explorations (demonstrated by stability of lesions during a year or more) [table 2]. The analysis of sensitivity and specificity are shown in [table 3].
Note that the highest accuracy was achieved by the combination of digital mammography and the combination of additional techniques,...
DBT or both,
in combination with DM,
significantly increased the AUC of DM. Moreover,
the combination DM+US was significantly superior to DM+DBT in this lesion-based study
Abdulrahman GO Jr,
Epidemiology of breast cancer in Europe andAfrica.J Cancer Epidemiol 2012:915610. 2.
Swedish two-county trial: impact of mammographicscreening on breast cancer mortality during 3 decades.
Radiology 2011;260:658-663. 3.
Is mammographic screening justifiable considering its substantial overdiagnosis rate and minor effect on mortality?Radiology 2011 ;260:621-627. 4.